Beyond use: Understanding evaluation's influence on attitudes and actions

American Journal of Evaluation

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 293-314

  Henry, Gary T ^a   Mark, Melvin M ^b  

^a GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0142119445     PISSN: 10982140     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1098-2140(03)00056-0     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Ajzen I. 2001 Nature and operation of attitudes. In S. T. Fiske, D. L. Schacter, & C. Zahn-Wexler (Eds.), Annual Review of Psychology 52 27-58
2. Alkin M.C. (Ed.). (1990). Debates on evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
3. Alkin M.C. 2003 Introduction (to section on evaluation use). In T. Kelligan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 189-196). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4. Alkin M.C. Daillak R. & White P. 1979 Using evaluations: Does evaluation make a difference? Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5. Berry F.S. Berry W.D. State lottery adoptions as policy innovations: An event history analysis American Political Science Review 84 1990 395-415
6. Caplan N. 1977 A minimal set of condition necessary for the utilization of social science knowledge in the policy formulation at the national level. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 183-197). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
7. Caracelli V.J. 2000 Evaluation use at the threshold of the twenty-first century. In V. J. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 88 (pp. 99-111). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
8. Caracelli V. & Preskill H. (eds). The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 88, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9. Cook F.L. et al. Media and agenda setting: Effects on the public, interest group leaders, policy makers, and policy Public Opinion Quarterly 47 1983 16-35
10. Cousins J.B. 2003 Utilization effects of participatory evaluation. In T. Kelligan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 245-266). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11. Cousins J.B. Leithwood K.A. Current empirical research on evaluation utilization Review of Educational Research 56 1986 331-364
12. Fetterman D.M. 2001 Foundations of empowerment evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Fuller B. Kagan S.L. Caspary G.L. Gauthier C.A. Welfare reform and child care options for low-income families The Future of Children 12 2002 97-119
14. Glazer N. How social problems are born The Public Interest 115 1994 31-44
15. Greenberg D. Mandell M. Onstott M. The dissemination and utilization of welfare-to-work experiments in state policymaking Journal of Policy Analysis & Management 19 2000 367-382
16. Henry G.T. Transparency, stakeholder involvement, and explanation in contemporary evaluation: A review essay stimulated by Success in Early Intervention: The Chicago Child-Parent Centers by Arthur J. Reynolds American Journal of Evaluation 23 2002 235-244
17. Henry G.T. 2000 Why not use? In V. J. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 88, (pp. 85-98). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
18. Henry G.T. Gordon C.S. Tracking issue attention: Specifying the dynamics of the public agenda Public Opinion Quarterly 65 2001 157-177
19. Henry G.T. Gordon C.S. Driving less for better air: Impacts of a public information campaign Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 22 2003 45-63
20. Henry G.T. & Julnes G. 1998 Values and realist evaluation. In G. Henry, G. Julnos, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), Realist evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 78 (pp. 53-72). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
21. Henry G.T. & Mark M.M. 2003 Toward an agenda for research on evaluation. In C. A. Christie (Ed.), The practice-theory relationship in evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 97 (pp. 69-80). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22. Henry G.T. & Rog D. J. 1998 A realist theory and analysis of utilization. In G. Henry, G. Julnes, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), Realist evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 78 (pp. 89-102). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
23. Higgins E.T. Rholes W. Jones C.R. Category accessibility and impression formation Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 13 1977 141-154
24. Hofstetter C.H. & Alkin M.C. 2003 Evaluation use revisited. In T. Kellaghan & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 197-222). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
25. House E. 1995 Principled evaluation: A critique of the AEA guiding principles. Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 66 (pp. 27-34). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26. King J.A. 2002 Building the evaluation capacity of a school district. In D. W. Compton, M. Baizerman, & S. H. Stackdill (Eds.), The art, craft, and science of evaluation capacity building. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 93 (pp. 63-80). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27. King J. Thompson R. & Pechman E. 1981 Improving evaluation use in local school settings. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
28. Kirkhart K. 2000 Reconceptualizing evaluation use: An integrated theory of influence. In V. Caracelli & H. Preskill (Eds.), The expanding scope of evaluation use. New Directions for Evaluation, No. 88 (pp. 5-24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
29. Knorr K.D. 1977 Policymakers' use of social science knowledge: Symbolic or instrumental? In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 165-182). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
30. Krosnick J.A. Brannon L.A. The impact of the gulf war on the ingredients of presidential evaluations: Multidimensional effects of political involvement American Political Science Review 87 1993 963-975
31. Krosnick J.A. Kinder D.R. Altering the foundations of support for the president through priming American Political Science Review 84 1990 497-512
32. Majone G. 1989 Evidence, arguments, and persuasion in the policy process. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
33. Mark M.M. Evaluation's future: Furor, futile, or fertile? American Journal of Evaluation 22 2001 457-479
34. Mark M.M. 2003 Toward a comprehensive view of the theory and practice of program and policy evaluation. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium (pp. 183-204). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35. Mark M.M. & Henry G.T. (in press). The mechanisms and outcomes of evaluation influence.
36. Mark M.M. Henry G.T. & Julnes G. 2000 Evaluation: An integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
37. McCombs M.E. Zhu J. Capacity, diversity, and volatility of the public agenda: Trends from 1954 to 1994 Public Opinion Quarterly 59 1995 495-525
38. Mintrom M. Policy entrepreneurs and the diffusion of innovation American Journal of Political Science 41 1997 738-770
39. Monroe A. Public opinion and public policy: 1980-1993 Public Opinion Quarterly 62 1998 6-27
40. Moscovici S. Lage E. Naffrechoux M. Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority to a color-perception task Sociometry 32 1969 365-380
41. Nelson T. Clawson R.A. Oxley Z.M. Media framing of a civil liberties conflict and its effect on tolerance American Political Science Review 91 1997 1002-1009
42. Neuman R.W. The threshold of public attention Public Opinion Quarterly 54 1990 159-176
43. Page B.I. & Shapiro R.Y. 1992 The rational public. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
44. Patton M.Q. The evaluator's responsibility for utilization Evaluation Practice 9 1988 5-24
45. Patton M.Q. 1997 Utilization-focused evaluation: The new-century text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Patton M.Q. Grimes P.S. Guthrie K.M. Brennan N.J. French B.D. & Blyth D.A. 1977 In search of impact: An analysis of the utilization of federal health evaluation research. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 141-164). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
47. Petty R.E. & Cacioppo J.T. 1986 Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
48. Preskill H. Caracelli V.J. Current and developing conceptions of use: Evaluation Use Topical Interest Group survey results Evaluation Practice 18 1997 209-225
49. Reynolds A.J. Temple J.A. Roberston D.L. Mann E.A. Long-term effects of an early childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest Journal of the American Medical Association 285 2001 2339-2346
50. Rog D.J. 1985 A methodological analysis of evaluability assessment. Doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
51. Russ-Eft D. Atwood R. Egherman T. Use and non-use of evaluation results: Case study of environmental influences in the private sector American Journal of Evaluation 23 2002 33-44
52. Sabatier P.A. & Jenkins-Smith H.C. 1993 Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
53. Sabatier P.A. & Jenkins-Smith H.C. 1998 The advocacy coalition framework. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of policy change (pp. 117-166). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
54. Shulha L.M. Cousins J.B. Evaluation use: Theory, research, and practice since 1986 Evaluation Practice 18 1997 195-208
55. Shulock N. The paradox of policy analysis: If it is not used, why do we produce so much of it? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 18 1999 226-244
56. Sinclair R.C. Mark M.M. Shotland R.L. Construct accessibility and generalizability across response categories Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 13 1987 239-252
57. Suchman E.A. 1967 Evaluation research: Principles and practices in public service and social action programs. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
58. Weick K.E. Quinn R.E. Organizational change and development Annual Review of Psychology 50 1999 361-386
59. Weiss C.H. The many meanings of research utilization Public Administration Review 39 1979 426-431
60. Weiss C.H. Evaluation for decisions: Is anybody there? Does anybody care? Evaluation Practice 9 1988a 5-19
61. Weiss C.H. If program decision hinged only on information: a response to Patton Evaluation Practice 9 1988b 15-28
62. Weiss C.H. Improving the use of evaluations: Whose job is it anyway? Advances in Educational Productivity 7 1998 263-276
63. Weiss C.H. & Bucuvalas M.J. 1977 The challenge of social research to decision making. In C. H. Weiss (Ed), Using social research in public policy making (pp. 213-234). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
64. Zaslow M.J. Moore K.A. Brooks J.L. Morris P.A. Tout K. Redd Z.A. Emig C.A. Experimental studies of welfare reform and children The Future of Children 12 2002 79-95
65. Zhu J. Issue competition and attention distraction: A zero-sum theory of agenda setting Journalism Quarterly 69 1992 825-836